ridethecliche

It's racing and that's totally fair game because that's part of racing.

What's really bogus is getting lapped in a crit to help give a teammate a leadout for the sprint.

ridethecliche

And this is why people who are in no contention of placing anywhere need to just sit up at the end of a race.

jcpups608

This was my first thought when seeing the pic.

Trucker Dan

Points for the overall are 10 deep. There was still time to work your way up for a top 10. Also around here if there is any gap before the end of the field and a rider they score you as dnf. Field finishes count for 4-3 upgrades. Makes for some really dangerous sprints.

kudude

and I think you can upgrade to 3s on top 20s (in large fields, maybe I"m confusing that, but I know you can use top 10s). Either way I should find out since that's probably how I'M getting my upgrade

tspek

In order to upgrade with those top 10 finishes, you need 20 races or more before you can upgrade.

MtnRide

Almost, but norcal doesn't honor the pack finish guideline. https://www.ncnca.org/docs/upgrade/index.shtml

kudude

feck. Now I have to ride faster

umd

Actually you need 25 races either way. I don't remember if the 10 from the 5->4 count or not.

Additionally, for 10 top 10s, fields need to be 30 or more.

And for 20 pack finishes, fields need to be over 50. That means cat 5 pack finishes don't count, since they are limited to 50.

umd

Those rules do not say that it doesn't count, it just doesn't list it as an option. The rules changed two or three years ago, I think they just didn't update the site.

I remember now that the races just have to meet the minimum time/distance requirements. Note that they updated the rules again this year to give minimum time or distance for crits, rather than just distance as previously.

MtnRide

Actually, they've said several times that pack finishes won't count in norcal. Reiterated at our last team meeting by an official. The standpoint of the NCNCA is that those are guidelines, not rules, for upgrading, so they can choose to not use them all. That might change with the new board and leadership.

umd

Fair enough

johnybutts

my and my teammate taking 1 and 2

DrWJODonnell

+1

ridethecliche

If you aren't racing and competitive in the 4's, atleast competitive enough for top 10's in crits or road races, then why would you go for the upgrade?

I've placed well in crits and still sat up during last laps because I was too far back to make it 'worth it' to get to the front. If you can get by like 30 guys and get on the podium or in the top 10, then you probably could have been in the top 10 out of the last corner.

Just sayin'.

kuf

Because you want to ride with a group less likely to crash. Or you are good at TTs and stage races, but there are no points to upgrade from those for 4->3.

kuf

It's a USA cycling license, not a NCNCA license, so it doesn't seem fair that the local rep should decide not to follow the standards of USAC. A person can come into NCNCA area from out of district and have upgraded using the experience track, and they don't get downgraded when moving into that area, or racing in that area. Seems you could rent a PO Box in a different area so you are under a different USAC region and upgrade that way.

ridethecliche

Um, there are plenty of stage race points in the 4's if I'm not mistaken.

I understand what you're saying, but still. If you're competitive in stage races, you should still be able to finish in the top ten of a road race.

umd

4's don't get GC points like 3's and 2's do. If they did, jmechy already could have upgraded... but I'm sure he now appreciates the chance to actually win a race first

MtnRide

There are ways to circumvent any system. The local administrator is just trying to address the situation within district. Getting a PO box out of district is a pretty drastic step just to get a relatively unimportant upgrade. I'm not sure why you'd want to upgrade if you can't finish top 10 in cat 4 races anyway. If a rider upgrades out of district, that's fine. There's a lot of overlap in the categories, as you know.

I personally think any upgrade past 5 should be by points, but I understand the need to balance the field sizes a bit. Also, the "standards" are guidelines, not rules. Upgrades should be about ability, not the end goal of racing.

kuf

The PO Box is just an extreme example to show that it is possible to circumvent the NCNCA . It's a national license, not a regional license, so not following the national guidelines and not upgrading riders on experience while other regions do is not fair.

I could understand that if it were a regional license, and all riders in all races in the NCNCA region needed to upgrade on points only, but this isn't the case. I race in both NCNCA and SCNCA races, but live in SCNCA region. I could upgrade on experience (eventually) and would regularly race in NCNCA races.

I understand they are guidelines, but imagine NCNCA deciding that you needed 25 point to upgrade to a 3, or 30 points. After all 20 points is just a guideline. Disagreeing with the national guidelines and refuising to follow them when issuing a national license is ridiculous.

So points are the only determinant of ability?

botto 

wrong thread.

MtnRide

I guess I'm sorry you feel that way. It works for the NCNCA and few seem to have an issue with it. And yes, I would argue that race results are indicative of bike racing ability, more so than just rolling in with a pack. The last NCNCA president has publicly announced that he's ignoring the pack finish guideline for a variety of reasons, and USAC has not had any issue with that, but if you feel strongly about it you can file a grievance with the USAC.

botto 

wrong thread.

MtnRide

Why do you care?